Discovery 4 5.0 V8
Discussion
Whilst on the look out for a Disco 3 V8 and doing some research on line I saw reference to Disco 4 with a 5.0 V8.
It implied that a few were sold in the UK when the D4 was launched back in 2009.
Anybody on here owned on driven one or personally knows of someone who does?
Would be nice to know if they were available and not just an inter web myth.
Could not see any reference on 'How many left'
It implied that a few were sold in the UK when the D4 was launched back in 2009.
Anybody on here owned on driven one or personally knows of someone who does?
Would be nice to know if they were available and not just an inter web myth.
Could not see any reference on 'How many left'
The 5.0 NA V8 was never sold into the European market. The only cars which could possibly be available would be anything reworked and SVA'd after the initial launch of the D4... However, this would be very much an exception and the total number of cars would probably be single digits!!
Frankly, you'd be better off looking out for a set of hens teeth!!
M
Frankly, you'd be better off looking out for a set of hens teeth!!
M
Maybe Land Rover at one point did the same as their sister company Jaguar.
3 weeks ago I traded in my Jaguar for a MY 2015 Discovery Sport SD4 HSE Luxury. The Jaguar was a 2009 MY XF 5.0 V8 n/a Portfolio Plus. Jaguar never marketed this car in the UK with this engine: it is the standard set up for the USA market. It was possible for 2-3 years to specify this model to order only. Research indicates that there may have been 80 or so orders placed for this particular engine model. The original owner of my particular Jaguar was a Jaguar executive so it was fully loaded.
Perhaps Land Rover did something discretely similar for a while, hence the OP's interest.
R.
3 weeks ago I traded in my Jaguar for a MY 2015 Discovery Sport SD4 HSE Luxury. The Jaguar was a 2009 MY XF 5.0 V8 n/a Portfolio Plus. Jaguar never marketed this car in the UK with this engine: it is the standard set up for the USA market. It was possible for 2-3 years to specify this model to order only. Research indicates that there may have been 80 or so orders placed for this particular engine model. The original owner of my particular Jaguar was a Jaguar executive so it was fully loaded.
Perhaps Land Rover did something discretely similar for a while, hence the OP's interest.
R.
gizlaroc said:
I see there have been a couple of Disco Sport Si4's for sale at main dealers recently, WTF that is not offered here I don't know, it is what that car is screaming out for.
They sell bugger all Evoque Si4s here, I can't imagine that the Disco Sport Si4 would be more popular!The 4cyl diesel ruins the car though.
The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
gizlaroc said:
The 4cyl diesel ruins the car though.
The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
I totally agree with you - the Si4 is by far the better car in the Evoque (I've never been in a Disco Sport)The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
For company car users the SD4 makes more sense, but as a private purchase I'd definitely prefer the Si4
gizlaroc said:
The 4cyl diesel ruins the car though.
The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
Over the 14k miles we have had the DS2.0d it's averaged 40.9 mpg and the engine is very good and does not ruin the car!The Si4 Evoque is really, really nice to drive, if I could live with the flashy looks of the Evoque I would have considered one.
Also the Si4 demo car was showing 28mpg, the SD4 was showing 32mpg. Hardly worth the sacrifice to save 15% on fuel, what is that as overall running cost? 2%? £7 a week for most people?
Now if you could mate the Si4 to a manual box then that would make a big difference but in auto it makes very little difference. IMO
Edited by Granfondo on Saturday 7th January 15:10
Granfondo said:
Over the 14k miles we have had the DS2.0d it's averaged 40.9 mpg and the engine is very good and does not ruin the car!
Now if you could mate the Si4 to a manual box then that would make a big difference but in auto it makes very little difference. IMO
If you got 40.9 from the SD4 than you would see 35 from the Si4. Now if you could mate the Si4 to a manual box then that would make a big difference but in auto it makes very little difference. IMO
Looking on the forums most are getting around 34-37mpg from the SD4, you're doing well.
The difference in refinement is far from subtle, the difference in performance is far from subtle. Hence why I think it ruins the car.
I put a deposit down for a Disco Sport as I presumed they would offer the Si4 engine, they didn't. Not everyone wants a diesel engine.
On a car that is depreciating at £450 a month, costing £30 a month in servicing, £30 a month in tyres, £40 a month in insurance and £200 a month in fuel, why would I want to swap a 250hp turbo petrol for a 190hp clattery diesel to try and save myself £7 a week in fuel? It makes no sense what so ever to me. But each to their own.
gizlaroc said:
If you got 40.9 from the SD4 than you would see 35 from the Si4.
Looking on the forums most are getting around 34-37mpg from the SD4, you're doing well.
The difference in refinement is far from subtle, the difference in performance is far from subtle. Hence why I think it ruins the car.
I put a deposit down for a Disco Sport as I presumed they would offer the Si4 engine, they didn't. Not everyone wants a diesel engine.
On a car that is depreciating at £450 a month, costing £30 a month in servicing, £30 a month in tyres, £40 a month in insurance and £200 a month in fuel, why would I want to swap a 250hp turbo petrol for a 190hp clattery diesel to try and save myself £7 a week in fuel? It makes no sense what so ever to me. But each to their own. :
I'am no diesel fanboy but in an auto SUV the depreciation will be far greater in the petrol and as for the noise element maybe that would be true if you drove the car sitting on the outside!Looking on the forums most are getting around 34-37mpg from the SD4, you're doing well.
The difference in refinement is far from subtle, the difference in performance is far from subtle. Hence why I think it ruins the car.
I put a deposit down for a Disco Sport as I presumed they would offer the Si4 engine, they didn't. Not everyone wants a diesel engine.
On a car that is depreciating at £450 a month, costing £30 a month in servicing, £30 a month in tyres, £40 a month in insurance and £200 a month in fuel, why would I want to swap a 250hp turbo petrol for a 190hp clattery diesel to try and save myself £7 a week in fuel? It makes no sense what so ever to me. But each to their own. :
It's all irrelevant at the moment because they don't offer that engine at the moment but it does not "ruin the car"!
Maybe a petrol F-Pace or the new Supercharged 3.0 RRS would be better for you?
P.S. Not that it makes a bit of difference to me but your figures are a bit off IMO the real world fuel will easily go from your £30 pm saving to £50-60pm and the depreciation on the petrol will be at least £150pm more so over 3 years £6000 plus the RFL will be more and if you can offset costs against a buisiness there is a saving to be made there also!
It makes no sense to me to be over £6k worse off to be in an auto petrol SUV. But each to their own.
Edited by Granfondo on Sunday 8th January 11:27
It doesn't depreciate £150 more, on the Evoque the petrol HSE Dynamic was £800 more than the TD4 HSE Dynamic, and the GFV after 36 months was only £500 less than the TD4, so Land Rover don't think it will depreciate less. And try and buy one used, they are far from cheaper!
Same with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
Same with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
gizlaroc said:
It doesn't depreciate £150 more, on the Evoque the petrol HSE Dynamic was £800 more than the TD4 HSE Dynamic, and the GFV after 36 months was only £500 less than the TD4, so Land Rover don't think it will depreciate less. And try and buy one used, they are far from cheaper!
Same with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
GFV is only an indication of what you need to pay to "own" it and dealers do not want to hold petrol Evoques so will bid poorly compared to a diesel which they know will sell!Same with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
The new 2.0d is a lot less gruff than the 2.2 and coupled with the 9 speed auto makes very smooth economical driving and is extremely quiet at 70mph doing 1500 revs!
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is that the engine does NOT ruin the car!
gizlaroc said:
It doesn't depreciate £150 more, on the Evoque the petrol HSE Dynamic was £800 more than the TD4 HSE Dynamic, and the GFV after 36 months was only £500 less than the TD4, so Land Rover don't think it will depreciate less. And try and buy one used, they are far from cheaper!
Same with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
I reckon about 29-30mpg from our SD4 automatic. Damn thirsty car for what it isSame with Audis and their 1.4Tfsi vs 2.0dti, Merc with the C200 vs C200d, it is a myth that they depreciate more, there are so few compared to the diesels that they often command a premium used.
The engine is gruff, through vibrations in the cabin and when you put your foot down it was really obvious, I'm sure you would get used to it, but jumping out of a petrol into it I decided I couldn't live with it, and that is what ruined it for me. It is only a personal opinion.
And on the price difference at the pumps, most people do around 12k miles a year.
27mpg on the Si4 is what most owners on the forums seem to get, which is £42 a week in fuel, TD4 or SD4 most owners seem to get around 33mpg with a few seeing 36mpg, so let's say 36mpg which is £33 a week.
£9 difference a week.
I simply don't think as an overall percentage of vehicle ownership it is as big a saving as many owners think they are getting, and if the manufactures had to post up real owners MPG figures I think we would see a shift away from diesel.
We've been to look at an F-Pace and Range Rover Sport today to replace it now it's started routinely melting its headlight connectors
gizlaroc said:
Be interested to hear which you prefer out of those two.
Range Rover Sport because of towing. My Disco 4 is the tow car at the moment, but it would be useful to have another. If we go for the F-Pace, it would be the 3.0 diesel V6 because it can tow 2400kg but the 2.0 can only tow 2000kgJimmy Recard said:
gizlaroc said:
Be interested to hear which you prefer out of those two.
Range Rover Sport because of towing. My Disco 4 is the tow car at the moment, but it would be useful to have another. If we go for the F-Pace, it would be the 3.0 diesel V6 because it can tow 2400kg but the 2.0 can only tow 2000kg
Granfondo said:
No towing for me but just the overall feel of the car is so much better, inside the quality is night and day better in the RRS and the drive is real RR but press Dynamic mode and the car just seems to shrink around you and be so squat on the road!
Also that - the Range Rover Sport is a cut above the F-Pace. I've only driven the 2.0 diesel F Pace, I admirGassing Station | Land Rover | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff